The passage and lecture are mainly about burning mirror which is type of weapon used by Creek to defence themselives from Roman attack readind passage claim that story of burning mirror is just myth Lecturer castsc doubt on claim made in article She menti

Essay topics:

The passage and lecture are mainly about (burning mirror) which is type of weapon used by Creek to defence themselives from Roman attack. readind passage claim that story of burning mirror is just myth. Lecturer castsc doubt on claim made in article, She mentions, claim impracticl story about burning weapon is inconvineince.
First, the author believe that ancient Greeks were not technologically advanced to make this type of weapon, mirror that can focus sunlight with specific intensity need to be several meters in wide and precise parabolic curvature. This point challenge by lecturer, She states, large mirror can made of many small pieces of thin copper sheet and make precise parabolic curvature, then focus on sunlight to produce fire.
Second, the writer argues, burning mirror takes about ten minutes to can burn wood. This argument rebutts by professor. She points out to additional materials that ships made of rather than wood like sticky materiat called pitch which proofs the ships from water, these material can fire in one second, moreover, after firing of sticky material, the fire can catch wood therefore the ship will totaly burn.
Finally. The author elaborates on, burning mirror dos not seem nlike improvement on a weaponthat G reek always used as flaming arrows. The professor in the other hand illustretes to burning mirror is more effective than using flaming arrows, since enemies are familiar with the flaming arrows, furthermore can see them from distance, in addition using burning mirror will surprise them, inconclusion it is more influential method to fire ships.

The passage and lecture are mainly about (burning mirror) which is type of weapon used by Creek to defence themselives from Roman attack. readind passage claim that story of burning mirror is just myth. Lecturer castsc doubt on claim made in article, She mentions, claim impracticl story about burning weapon is inconvineince.
First, the author believe that ancient Greeks were not technologically advanced to make this type of weapon, mirror that can focus sunlight with specific intensity need to be several meters in wide and precise parabolic curvature. This point challenge by lecturer, She states, large mirror can made of many small pieces of thin copper sheet and make precise parabolic curvature, then focus on sunlight to produce fire.
Second, the writer argues, burning mirror takes about ten minutes to can burn wood. This argument rebutts by professor. She points out to additional materials that ships made of rather than wood like sticky materiat called pitch which proofs the ships from water, these material can fire in one second, moreover, after firing of sticky material, the fire can catch wood therefore the ship will totaly burn.
Finally. The author elaborates on, burning mirror dos not seem nlike improvement on a weaponthat G reek always used as flaming arrows. The professor in the other hand illustretes to burning mirror is more effective than using flaming arrows, since enemies are familiar with the flaming arrows, furthermore can see them from distance, in addition using burning mirror will surprise them, inconclusion it is more influential method to fire ships.

Votes
Average: 7.6 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2021-01-12 talelaldabous 76 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user talelaldabous :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The passage and lecture are mainly about...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 142, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Readind
... defence themselives from Roman attack. readind passage claim that story of burning mir...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...about burning weapon is inconvineince. First, the author believe that ancient G...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 147, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f weapon, mirror that can focus sunlight with specific intensity need to be sever...
^^
Line 2, column 284, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...point challenge by lecturer, She states, large mirror can made of many small pie...
^^
Line 2, column 310, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...r, She states, large mirror can made of many small pieces of thin copper sheet a...
^^
Line 2, column 359, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...all pieces of thin copper sheet and make precise parabolic curvature, then focus ...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d therefore the ship will totaly burn. Finally. The author elaborates on, burni...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 7, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Finally,
...efore the ship will totaly burn. Finally. The author elaborates on, burning mirr...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, if, moreover, second, so, then, therefore, in addition

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1346.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 256.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2578125 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47797918865 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.62109375 0.540411800872 115% => OK
syllable_count: 417.6 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 88.3011324956 49.2860985944 179% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.6 110.228320801 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.8 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 4.19205298013 215% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.462145375724 0.272083759551 170% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.223085485779 0.0996497079465 224% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.218342308396 0.0662205650399 330% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.305759220259 0.162205337803 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.324969938934 0.0443174109184 733% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.3589403974 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 53.8541721854 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.